Search
Filter results
- Years
- 1
- More
- Stages of the proceedings
- 1
- More
- Outcome of the proceedings
- 1
- More
- Type of the proceedings
- 1
- More
On Compliance of Para 91, Para 92, Para 98 and Para 99, and Para 2 of Annex 8 of the Cabinet Regulation of 10 March 2019 No. 221 “Regulations Regarding Electricity Production and Price Determination upon Production of Electricity in Cogeneration” and of the last sentence of Para 638, Para 106, Para 107, Para 113 and Para 114, and Para 2 of Annex 10 of the Cabinet Regulation of 16 March 2010 No. 262 “Regulations Regarding Electricity Production and Price Determination upon Production of Electricity from Renewable Resources” with Article 64 of the Satversme of the Republic of Latvia
Case short name: Overcompensation calculation for the mandatory procurement of electricityThe Constitutional Court held:
to recognise Para 91, Para 92, Para 98 and Para 99, and Para 2 of Annex 8 of the Cabinet Regulation of 10 March 2019 No. 221 “Regulations Regarding Electricity Production and Price Determination upon Production of Electricity in Cogeneration” and of the last sentence of Para 638, Para 106, Para 107, Para 113 and Para 114, and Para 2 of Annex 10 of the Cabinet Regulation of 16 March 2010 No. 262 “Regulations Regarding Electricity Production and Price Determination upon Production of Electricity from Renewable Resources” as being compatible with Article 64 of the Satversme of the Republic of Latvia.
-
The norms of the Cabinet Regulation on the implementation of the mandatory electricity procurement – control of self-consumption and calculation of overcompensation – comply with Article 64 of the Satversme
-
A case initiated with regard to norms that regulate the calculation of overcompensation and control of self-consumption for producers of electricity, who receive state support in the form of mandatory electricity procurement